nitromefandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Speculation and not noteworthy
Recently NOBODY made a decision to delete Trivia that involves possible things that may have inspired a Nitrome element, but are not official. Link Now I'm thinking, why don't we just remove all of them as much as we can find on this wiki. Who agrees with that? -- 07:23, January 23, 2015 (UTC) :I'm against getting rid of all of them. I think that in general people tend to say that a game was inspired by another one when it isn't likely and that people should be more selective about it. Some games are very obviously influenced by others such as NMD by Super Crate Box. 13:54, January 23, 2015 (UTC) ::@Frosty: It's not that they're unofficial, it's that they don't make much sense. The Stumped one for instance, didn't make much sense. Would Nitrome really base their main character off something in a book? Not likely. Furthermore, Nitrome could have just used the foot because it fits with the horror theme. For the Sky Serpents one, I removed that trivia point because Sky Serpents is obviously influenced by Shadow of the Colossus. ::I'm fine with removing speculative trivia points if they don't make much sense, but not because they aren't official. Whether they're unofficial, unless Nitrome says they didn't base it off that, doesn't matter because most are unofficial. -- 16:45, January 23, 2015 (UTC) ::::But who decides whether it's speculative or not? That's a tricky thing to do... :::: EDIT: Does this include all of the "this character has a resemblance with blablabla"? I think it fits well since plenty of things can look like something else unintentionally. ::::-- 20:15, January 23, 2015 (UTC) :::::They all are. I'm talking about speculative trivia points "that don't make much sense". -- 20:18, January 23, 2015 (UTC) ::::::::Hmm, I guess this is all opinion based then. Now we're back to square one unless the defenition of "doesn't make sense" won't change from person to person. ::::::::-- 20:23, January 23, 2015 (UTC) (Reset indent) I think what everyone considers "not much sense" would be rather standard. For example, I removed the Stumped one because it didn't seem likely Nitrome would base the main character of a game based of something trivial in a book. The resemblance trivia is a little different, but I think doing away with that would be okay, unless there's some strong resemblance and further info to back it up. For example, saying the bearded man looks like Mario and also citing the game's retro theme would be make enough sense. Also, we should try to get RSK's opinion about this situation. -- 20:38, January 23, 2015 (UTC) :Major bumparoony. :I remember typing up a response to this eons ago, but I guess I never posted it. Oh well. :I get that some references seem so painfully obvious that I can see why people would be like "oh duh why didn't anyone post this yet?" But at the same time, said references really only make sense to the people who are familiar with them. Mario/Metroid references are just interesting to people who actually play and know what those games are. And if you haven't, you're just stuck reading lines of claims that you can't really care for or back up yourself. Additionally, I'm not one to believe that we can simply dismiss a reference just because it doesn't seem likely that Nitrome would base a game off a book. There are Nitrome games out there that aren't necessarily influenced by other games. (Wasn't Feed Me based on the behaviour of a venus flytrap alone?) So a book is not totally out of this world. What, do the Nitrome staff never read? Don't get me wrong though; I still wouldn't add it because it is speculation but we cannot use this reasoning to dismiss this piece of speculation alone and not others where "it's super obvious". :It's also worth mentioning no matter how "obvious" a reference seems (ie. when Takeshi said that NMD is "very obviously" influenced by Super Crate Box - and I'm not denying that's not true), if you don't have any proof to back it up, then it's still speculation. And I'm not talking about writing very intricate details on why that reference is viable, or showcasing pictures of said object alongside the Nitrome one. I mean like getting actual proof from a developer log or something where said developer mentions that they were influenced by...whatever. An example of this would be Rainbogeddon where Nitrome clearly states that this game was influenced by Pac-Man. So yeah you could add the trivia point and place a citation for that. :Some people were (are?) just so hung up on "obvious" references that, many times, they end up being wrong. I can't remember exactly, but I recall we put in information on the influences for Platform Panic with just base assumption. Many of these ended up being inaccurate. Some characters were actually based off more than one character but we didn't mention that initially. As a Pixel Love example, many people in game comments thought Howmonica was influenced by VVVVVV. And you could arguably make a case for it, since VVVVVV is a very well known flip-mechanic game. But if you read the developer comments, he claims the case to be different, and that the flipping mechanic he developed was based off a programming accident. :So in short, yes, I believe that all these "X is VERY OBVIOUSLY influenced by Super Mario Brothers 89 because blah blah blah" points should be removed, unless there is a reference to back it up. Even so, these points don't necessarily belong in the trivia section. But of course it depends. We should even remove the less subtle versions (X is inspired/influenced by ), some which I may be guilty of adding in myself - again, unless there is a citation you can use to prove it. :As for the "resemblance" thing, yeah, we should probably just remove those too. "resemble" is a very loose term, and could describe the similarities for multiple trivial objects. The Hazmat Hero could resemble my Espresso speaker because both of them are yellow. 08:53, August 31, 2015 (UTC) ::Eh, as much I dislike removing these certain trivia pieces just because some seem very obvious to me in having similar appearance, I support not allowing this type of speculation trivia because everyone's opinion differs on X looks like it influenced Y. There is no real way to ever make a single, logical discerning rule for it because in the end it is all up to everyone's own opinion. 21:41, August 31, 2015 (UTC) :::How does a "very obvious" appearance make it more interesting trivia? Just because they have similar appearances or game mechanics does not mean one game was based on another. And saying things like "resemble" or "may be inspired" is very broad. 09:33, September 2, 2015 (UTC) ::::I'm confused... I said I am opposed to keeping it. 20:33, September 2, 2015 (UTC)